Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


11 "You're a bum, Rock"

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yeah but 6-2 is eight goals - a high-scoring game. I don't always lose when I concede early or win when I score early, but sometimes the team that scored early get fired up while at the same time the conceding team just shuts down. That's when big wins like those in the screenshots above occur. Other instances of high-scoring games occur when both teams go attacking.
  2. In all three matches, the first goal was scored in the first 10 minutes of the game. I have been on both sides of that, and quite often it leads to high-scoring games like this. When I have been on the receiving end, the performances of the whole team become truly dreadful while the other team shrugs off any poor morale or lack of faith and become supreme overlords of football. It might be that the morale swing caused by early goals is too extreme in some cases
  3. This will be helpful because user-related injuries (usually muscle and tendons) would then show up when the user is straining his players too much. Broken bones are then bad luck and not a random chance after a green injury and 80% condition. This is the kind of in-game feedback we're talking about. In addition it would be noticed by the head physio and relayed to you in staff meetings. This, and a regularly scheduled update from the assistant about who have been training well and who shows signs of, for instance, fatigue (jadedness) or even hints about a new hidden stat; mental readiness, would go a long way of both improving gameplay and realism.
  4. Obviously he won't get a new contract because of a tiny run of good form over half a year prior. It was a silly demand in the first place, and it became even more nonsensical for each week that passed where he either didn't play because of injury or played ordinarily/badly. Nobody gets a new contract for any other reason than that it is expiring in a year and I want them to stay/not leave for free. They can come knocking all they want, ranting like sulky children, but it will have absolutely no effect. If they actually want to stay at the club, then, they better learn to suck it up and carry on. Getting a seasoned professional hammering at my office door every time an inferior club emails me a lowball offer is not in any way representing reality. Their agents, yes - that is to be expected, but then having his client throwing an automatic hissy fit that I can't respond to in Classic is just adding an insult to injury.
  5. Actually he said he lost three matches, but have won only one in eight. Will the players ever "forgive me" if they have an issue? There was this player who played well in 3-4 matches in a row in December and subsequently wanted a new contract. Then he got injured for a couple of months. When he came back from that injury, he almost instantly complained about how badly I had treated him and got a couple of buddies with him on it. When I sold him in July he was still demanding that new contract due to good form... 7 months earlier. I like these efforts to make it harder to keep your in-form players, that players are on the move for something better, but when these "interactions" (there is no interaction in Classic, yet they are still there messing things up!) have so far-reaching consequences they need to make sense all the way. Right now there is much to be desired in this part of the game.
  6. They do, but the more common choice is to put them straight into the starting eleven once they are fit. The more important the player, the less likely he is to play reserve matches to regain match fitness. Are you seriously suggesting that what every manager on earth does with all his players is to, after an injury for instance, field them in the reserve team for 2-4 matches before they -dare- to use them in competitive matches at all?
  7. Actually, I see plenty of AI injuries in my games. After all, they -do- go Attack and heavily closing down too, often late in the game with tired players. They don't rotate as much as I do and therefore regularly start players with condition in the seventies or lower. I don't suffer (much) from injuries and average at 1-2 at any time, with peaks up to 4-5 in some periods. There is one player in my squad who is injury prone and if anybody is stretchered off it is usually him. That's season three with Bradford, though. Season one with Lazio was dreadful! Those Romans are brittle! In any case, me or you not having problems is a non-issue. Just thinking about it, I play two friendlies every week of the pre-season and never start players who lack match fitness - instead I let them play for the reserves until they are fully ready. The latter of those two is an adaptation to FM15. None of them are realistic, though - these things do not happen in the real world. I go in and change the setup that is already there (in Classic) to accomodate the needs for fitness in this ME, but isn't it reasonable to assume that the assistant does it right and that 5-6 friendlies are enough to give the whole squad match fitness so that they are ready for the season? It doesn't appear so - I took training out of the hands of the assistant and set it to Balanced and Average, yielding a Medium overall workload, and that's where it has been for three seasons. Nowhere in FM does it say that the players benefit from fitness training in pre-season, yet presumably it is a good idea. Does the assistant do that automatically? Is it a good idea to do so? Nobody knows, but I only do things that yields a verifiable, positive output with the goal to win FM... I'm not roleplaying.
  8. SI's numbers on average injury rates, at least as far as I am aware of, does not include a comparison between the real-life amount of players stretchered off during matches and the amount in FM15. That's what people are complaining about; not getting to do tactical substitutions because all three have been used for red injuries already. And not just once; so often that some people are getting upset about it. Besides, there is no documentation in-game on what the user needs to do to prevent injuries; or more to the point: connecting a high number of injuries with "you play an attacking tactic" is unnatural to most users, since they watch real-life football every weekend where one team dominates the match and pushes forward without seeing them having several players injured, and the commentators don't say "well, that's what you get when you close down like that the whole match" when players are injured either.
  9. Yeah except that in real life, every challenge does not lead to the ball carrier falling on his face, spending the next five seconds getting on his feet again. This takes him out of the game for a very crucial phase, unrealistically boosting counter tactics at the cost of attacking tactics. As was said above, there is an undisputed increase in the number of challenges in 15.3, which in itself may be a cause for the increased number of injuries. Compared to FM14, a player needs to play more minutes of football to gain the same number of match fitness points. "Contain is the new Attack" - meaning closing down and aggressiveness have been boosted in general; the advice given to people who complain about the number of injuries is to play a less demanding type of football, and it is advice given by people who play exquisitly attacking football by telling their world-class teams to "sit this one out, hoping to stop the opponent, do not try to attack"... as if that made sense. In addition there might be other factors contributing to injuries; the pitch - did it rain, was it soggy out there? It would make sense that this was a real-world factor contributing to injuries, and that it was therefore added to the game. No documentation about it as far as I know. When put together, it is just not true that "nothing has been changed regarding injuries". SI have changed a ton of things connected to closing down, willingness to tackle, the tempo and training/fitness part of the game; possibly without also changing the impact of low Bravery, Injury Proneness and Natural Fitness attributes in the database and in the player generation module. They have also given the AI more tactical options, including automatically going Attack/Overload once they are two or more goals down - something which generates a rather unrealistic battle of a football game if you don't meet it by easing off on your own strategy... and quite likely also more injuries. Soak tests are unlikely to reveal this because the AI is of course constantly adjusting to what the opposition team does. In the same savegame I and my friend have wildly different experiences regarding the number of injuries. While I have few problems, he is often left with no tactical substitutions because 3-4 of his players are carried off in a game. Yes - often! He plays a 442 Contain tactic by the way. I am still sure that SI's average injury rate is correct and even slightly lower than real life, but averages are not always telling the truth. The average woman gives birth to...what is it, 1.7 kids? Poor second toddler is a little bit off a full human then, and it's a shame isn't it? We can come with our own rosy tales of "no harm done in my save", but the truth is that a lot of SI's customers are experiencing that they have to carry off one, two, three of their players on a stretcher so often that it feels like "every game", and nothing in the game itself suggests that they are doing something wrong. Yes tell everyone that the previous Very Heavy training regimes are now not intended to work for long periods of time, and that low condition/match fitness increases the chance of injury - and tell them that pushing up and pressing high may cause more injuries especially when the opposition team also does the same, but don't continue this "we have not changed anything regarding injuries" nonsense, because you know it is a blatant lie.
  10. Would you say that Counter (no instructions) could realistically be used with a 343?
  11. Yes I used an attacking 343 wide diamond in the first season with Lazio. This created some high-scoring matches naturally, and as I expected, but there were some unexpected issues as well as expected ones: Expected: * Wide gap between attack and defense caused problems with getting out of defense in some matches (although I never managed to pinpoint exactly what made those opponents manage to do so while others didn't) * Complete domination in some matches, but also a big risk of breakdowns * Nemesis: 433 with attacking inside forwards crossing from one flank to the other (a little bit more nemesis than I hoped) Unexpected: * Many opponents used a 5-4-1 formation (or 3-3-2-1-1 if you want), and mostly I destroyed them because my wide midfielders dragged their defense apart - but sometimes they effectively stopped me. I don't know what caused these fluctuations, exactly. * My friend's 442 tactic that he downloaded from somewhere effectively stopped me too. When he used an attacking 433 narrow formation I destroyed him 7-0, so he had to employ full backs to stop my wingers. Apparently, that 442 is set to Contain, but he still scores many goals. That was surprising... Another thing I noticed was that using players who lacked match fitness was a real downfall. They moved the ball -so- slowly that they got caught in possession all the time. Once I realized that, I now let the reserve team deal with them until they are match fit - no exceptions. It is entirely possible that unrealistic football and inexplicable poor performances are caused at least in part by using players who have less than ~85% match fitness and/or who have not settled into the team yet. I suspect that "adventurous" tactics requiring quick, simultaneous movements and combinations to break down defenses are even more at risk when employing that kind of player than the more laidback tactics.
  12. Everyone and their mother uses Retain Possession, Work Ball into Box, Play Out of Defense and Lower Tempo because all the mentalities are too urgent in the final third. Without them, there is no probing for holes in the defense. At least, I haven't seen anyone post tactics without them.
  13. Except only the diehard fans in here would be happy about not overperforming. If there is no overperformance, the human's input makes no difference and then the game is pointless. I don't think my friend's sentiment, that he can't accept that the AI is posing any kind of danger if he's got the superior team, is unique in the FM userbase. The expectation is that if the tactic is good, it is not necessary to change key aspects in-match. You have to see this from the point of view of the limited-input user; as long as performances are fluctuating between completely overrunning the opposition and creating nothing at all, the user will have to discard the base tactic (or even the idea itself) - at no point during tactical testing will any user who is not familiar with the exact philosophy of football that is being propagated by SI and its advisors ever consider that the problem is the timing of runs/passing/tempo, so that changing a couple of roles around or ticking/unticking a team instruction would solve the whole thing. Let's create a fictional example: WBR-A...CDR-D...CDL-D...DL-S WMR-S...MCR-D..DLPL-S..WR-A ............DLF-S......AF-A Control, Fluid, Push Up, Close Down More, Play Narrower. Narrower to tighten up the midfield a bit and let the wing back have more space to run in, and the left winger's supposed to enter the area a little bit more rather than just hugging the line. The aggressive left winger has a more defensive-minded left back covering the hole behind him, and the playmaker gets space in front of him because of the advanced forward. The defensive midfielder leaves space in front of him for the deep-lying forward to drop deep and connect midfield and attack, and the wide midfielder pushes up to help him, before the wingback arrives in attacking positions. Things are very basic, space is used and controlled, and it is not an overly attacking tactic. The ball should move quickly and there should always be options in any phase. First phase the left side have early runs, second phase the midfield and wingback comes at full pace, third phase there are 4-6 players on the edge of the final third or midfield that are open for passes to start the attack again. Used at home, slight favourites, both teams neutral form. Suitable players for their role. If there are any problems with all this at this point, I can't really spot it. Anyways, what many of your customers experience is that A) the strikers shoot long before the second phase (i.e. when there is still only 1-2 players in the box), B) players are trying to walk through an opposition defender and then falls over, keeps hold of the ball for no reason and then falls over... or other silly brainfarts, or C) chances are actually created but the shots keep getting blocked or saved by a Superkeeper. It is not like the AI is not doing some of the above things when playing against me, btw. What has happened is that a deep and plentiful defense have made sure that the directness and urgency inherent in the Control strategy leads to stupid player mistakes. SI officials and moderators blame the user for not having created a "sound tactic", "seeing some flaws with your approach - read the 12 step guide" etc, and the user calls "poor ME". My question is this; why on earth would players instructed to control the match and take their chances, push forward and being aggressive opt to shoot from silly angles and attempt to shoot through other players rather than to recycle possession and try to prope for an opening? Why would the players do that when you tell them to go Attacking, for that matter? Why do we have to tell them to retain possession, work the ball into the box, and to slow the tempo down for them to move the ball from flank to flank looking for openings? We do already have the "go route one" and other team instructions that lets us kick the ball forward as quickly as possible and tell them to get those shots in, pronto! With the range of options available to us with the team and player instruction screens, I cannot make any other conclusion than that the contain-overload mentality instructions are misleading and pointless. At the very least, even on Attacking the default priority should not be to shoot at the first opportunity in or around the 16-meter box. That desperation should be reserved for Overload, and even then we should have to also tick off "go route one" and "shoot on sight" to get the level of urgency that we get now with Control.
  14. I think there are certain "quirks" with the ME that creates these illogical tactics because the feedback it gives the users is presented in a way that tricks him into a path of increasingly false positives. We both (or all?) agree that in a real football match (take Man U - Sunderland this Saturday for instance) there are only a handful of big chances created. I suspect most of us chooses Extended to watch most matches, and in a match like that one, where if I'm kind there are 4-5 highlights, the minutes would blister past and if 20 minutes of a match has gone without any highlights I would pause the game, check the stats and try to figure out what's wrong. Even though nothing is necessarily wrong according to SI. I would probably go more attacking, sending more people forward or play more adventerous in general in order to get the missing feedback, and the game will respond by giving them to me. However, in many cases the highlights end up in a hopeless, desperate shot, and a couple of those I would pause the game, look at the stats and try to figure out what's wrong. The issue is clearly that these awful players are singlemindedly interested in scoring a goal on their own, so we need to slow things down a bit. We then click on "Retain Possession", "Work Ball into Box" or even "Play Slower", even though we already attack with six persons and have only four guys defending/supporting, and have selected Attacking. Now we see improvement, a lot less dumb shots, but we keep playing the ball around looking for openings, pressing the opposition down into their own area. But whoa! when they win the ball our defense is just backing off and they just jog sideways next to the ball carrier and they are soooo passive! We pause the game, click on Push Up, Close Down More and Get Stuck In. If we still don't get a goal, we can see that they defend with everyone so we need even more people up there. There is no sign of the opposition posing any threat. We get plenty of highlights and we complain about ridiculous tackles, 50 shots a game and plenty of injuries. If we get a goal, the opposition answers with their own Attacking instructions, and then they also get 20-30 shots... stupidity ensues. We blame SI. They blame us. They are both right - it is the game's feedback that creates a negative cycle. There is poor communication. SI wants us to want to figure out the fine balance of the movement/passing/tempo trio using only in-game visual and statistical feedback as a source, which, taken out of the in-house context only encourages outrageous tactics in the hands of most users doing just that.
  15. I'm playing both Classic and the Full version and I don't think I miss that much when playing classic. There is likely some randomness to the match performances that I could possibly have avoided in the full version, but it is hard to say for sure. The lack of tutoring is probably the biggest issue. I see high scorelines, but since I am playing an attacking 3-4-3 that is only to be expected. There are some high scorelines in the AI vs AI matches as well, but these do happen in real life too. I don't see too many injuries but the guy I am playing against is; 2-4 in a match more often than not, based on the FB chat. Of course, we humans notice in-match injury number two, three and four more than the non-occurence of injuries. Regarding the high shot count/score lines that people report again and again in here, there is one thing I feel the need to call out the moderators in here on; the game produces relatively realistic football as long as the AI plays defensively against me. It is when they start playing more attacking football in order to pull back from going under that it starts getting ridiculous. Attacking vs Attacking ends up in one successful attack after another, unrealistic return-run speeds, sliding tackles where a player is five meters behind and then jumps in with both feet from behind... and succeeds, shots upon shots upon shots; basically mayhem! The thing is, if I am, say, Lazio and I play against some Serie B team in the cup, the difference in player quality should mean that they could go Attack all they want but they should not necessarily succeed in doing so. I will never switch to Counter to keep the lead in such a match, and I believe that the Lazio manager wouldn't do so in real life either. They would simply continue to do the same thing that has given them control of the match and goals. In FM15, I feel that when the manager tells the team to go more attacking, they succeed to do so; when he tells them to play wider and pass shorter, they succeed at it. That is not how it works in real life, and this is why I am talking about "one-uping" or "battle of wits" regarding this ME - the efficacy of the two tactics are being tested against each other, and the one who chooses the one that gives the team the most advantages against the other is the one who wins. That's not really football.
  • Create New...